My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP11637
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
11000-11999
>
WSP11637
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 3:18:20 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 5:05:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.126.J
Description
San Miguel Project
State
CO
Basin
San Juan/Dolores
Water Division
4
Date
9/1/1990
Author
Boyle Engineering Co
Title
San Miguel Project Water Supply Study Supplemental Report System Operations 1990 Irrigation Season
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Ir. <br />("~ <br />c.c <br /> <br />c <br /> <br />Actual operations of the Cone system reflected a mode of attempting to irrigate all lands <br />available, with the result that supplies were exhausted by the middle of June, The use of a <br />monthly time step in the model precludes the prediction of the timing of shortages or surpluses <br />on any finer scale, The shortage in mid-June on the Cone could not have been predicted by <br />the model in any terms other than "by the end of June" or "during the month of June". <br /> <br />Actual operations of the Gurley system reflected the rationing of available supplies by the ditch <br />company through the setting of maximum releases and also by individual irrigators In the <br />utilization of their storage water. The efforts implemented by the Gurley system extended their <br />irrigation run to the end of July, in general agreement with the projections, <br /> <br />On a broad scale, therefore, the consequences of two different courses of action in system <br />operations were predicted reasonably well by the model. Deviations between actual operations <br />and a demand-based operation tracked by user accounts will, however, continue to thwart <br />detailed comparisons, <br /> <br />Because of its general utility, no modifications to the model are recommended at this time. <br />However, use of the model in the future might reveal a need for modifications at that time, <br />Some factors which would allow for better utilization of the model as a working tool are <br />provided below: <br /> <br />1) Adequate flexibility was provided in the model input structure to allow for more detailed <br />projections of management options on an individual shareholder basis. This application <br />would require that the shareholder provide an indication of the management strategy or <br />strategies they wanted to investigate. <br /> <br />2) Implementation of a computerized water accounting system would allow for a more <br />accurate updating of projections over the course of an irrigation season. The <br />accounting system would provide more accurate, detailed information regarding the <br />current status of the system. <br /> <br />3) Any refinements made in fundamental information such as transit losses, soil <br />characteristics, and actual crop water demands would be useful in improving the <br />predictive capabilities of the model. <br /> <br />4) Implementation of a soil moisture monitoring network in the service area would allow for <br />a more accurate establishment of initial conditions and for more accurate updates over <br />the course of an irrigation season. <br /> <br />5) Deviations in the amount and timing between actual and projected runoff are reflected in <br />the model results. Any improvements to runoff forecasts would allow better projections <br />to be made, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.